The takeaway

The unemployment rate includes only those who are actively seeking a job, and seeking a job involves different incentives for married couples versus single heads of household.

Unemployment by marriage status

Our FRED graph above shows the unemployment rate for married men (blue solid line) and married women (green dashed line) as well as women heads of household (dotted orange line). There are a few stories revealed in this graph:

• The series for married women and the series for married men move in sync across business cycles.
• In the early years, these two series were separated by about 2 percentage points until they converged in the 1990s.
• The unemployment rate is considerably higher for women who maintain families—in single-parent households or in households where they’re the main breadwinner.

To be clear: The unemployment rate is not the fraction of those not working in the general population. The unemployment rate is the fraction of persons in the total labor force who are not working but are actively available and looking for a job. The labor force is made up of these persons plus those who are actively working.

The employment dynamics of marriage

Someone who’s married may be more likely to choose not to work than a single person. Also, women, in particular married women, have progressively increased their participation in the labor force over time. Thus, both sides of the unemployment rate may be affected in complex ways by the dynamics of marriage.

If one spouse in a married couple has a job, the incentives for the other spouse to work can be lower than a single person’s incentives. So, they may voluntarily choose not to work and remove themselves completely from the labor force. A smaller labor force raises the unemployment rate. If the non-working spouse is opportunistic about finding a job, they may be included in the labor force only when they have a job. This would lower the unemployment rate.

Women who maintain families

The situation is quite different for women who maintain families: They may need a job much more than married women. Hence, they may look much more intensely and frequently for a job and are less likely to be opportunistic about it and abandon their job search. So, their unemployment rate is markedly higher.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for release table A-10 from the Current Population Survey. Select the three series shown and click “Add to Graph.”

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann.

From last May to this May, manufacturing employment decreased by 0.4%. This number may seem small, but it’s a nationwide figure that can hide considerable variation across US states. So, in the FRED map above, we show state-specific numbers for manufacturing employment as of May 2026.

Most states are in negative territory, which is not surprising when the national number indicates a decrease. And, at the state level, a factory or two opening or closing can have a big impact, especially if the state is small or doesn’t have a large manufacturing base to begin with. Here are the highlights:

• Twelve states grew, including Rhode Island (+1.5%), Louisiana (+2%), and Connecticut (+3%).
• Three states didn’t change at all (0% growth).
• The rest of the states declined, some by quite a bit: Nebraska (-4.6%), Virginia (-4.9%), Alaska (-5.6%), and the District of Columbia (-9.1%).

How this map was created: Search FRED for “manufacturing employment” and pick any seasonally adjusted, state-level series. Then click on the map button, followed by the “Edit map” button. Change the units to “Percent change from year ago,” the data group by “User defined method,” setting values at -4, -2, 0, 2, and 4. Change colors for each category according to your taste.

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann.

On June 25, 2026, the Bureau of Economic Analysis released real GDP data for all US states for the first quarter of 2026. The FRED map above shows the annualized growth rates from the previous quarter: Red denotes contraction (less than 0% growth), light green denotes slow growth (0% to 2%), and dark green denotes stronger growth (>2% to 5%).

Highlights

• 47 of 50 state economies grew in the first quarter. The national average was 2.1% annualized growth.
• The median state (West Virginia) grew at 1.4%, which is below the national average, and 33 states had slower growth than the national average.
• Washington had the fastest annualized growth, at 4.5%.
• South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa contracted, with South Dakota experiencing the steepest contraction, at –1.6% annualized.

The St. Louis Fed’s Eighth District states all grew in the first quarter: Four states were slower than the national average (Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee), and three were faster (Arkansas, Indiana, and Mississippi).

Note: These data are subject to future revision by the source, with an annual revision the following March. Our ALFRED database records vintages of the data, so users can view the data as they appeared at various points in history. The link takes you to real GDP for Missouri, as of June 25, 2026.

How this map was created: Search FRED for “Real Total Gross Domestic Product for Missouri” and click the first available series. Click the “View Map” button and then the blue “Edit Map” button. Modify the units to “Compounded Annual Rate of Change.” Use “Format” to switch the number of color groups to 3, with the data grouped by “User Defined Method”; then define the scales to be 2 and 5. For values less than 0, choose red for contraction; for values less than 2, choose light green to show slight growth; for values less than 5, choose dark green to show moderate growth.

Suggested by John Fuller and Charles Gascon.